Eric Reitan

Transparency about the source of costs amounts to a "hostile and political act" only if the truth, clearly seen, is damaging to those in power.

This is Marco Rubio explaining how the USA promised to defend Ukraine forever if they got rid of their nuclear arsenal left after the Soviet Union fell.

This is why lil marco was sinking into the couch. He was hoping we wouldn’t find it…so don’t RT right now this very second.

Apparently "America First" means "America Alone." And "America Alone" entails "America Last."

Pray for America.

The sought to humiliate him. They failed. Instead, they shamed themselves. But their shamelessness renders them oblivious.

The President just signed an executive order declaring that the nation formerly called Canada shall now be called Ork. He has directed the CIA to devote its resources to identifying a resident of Ork named "Mork," hoping thereby to shore up support among Robin Williams fans.

YouTube video by The Ezra Klein Show Don't Believe Him | The Ezra Klein Show

If you haven't watched Ezra Klein's video essay, "Don't Believe Him," it is absolutely worth the 13 minutes. youtu.be/K8QLgLfqh6s?...

People routinely underestimate the long-term cost of using force (forcibly keeping people out of the country or removing them) and overestimate the long-term cost of the aid that helps people stay at home. A sensible border policy is advanced by a combination of border security and foreign aid. 2/2

Here's the thing about US foreign aid: it is intimately tied to the problem of migrant refugees flooding our borders. People don't want to leave their homeland unless the circumstances are intolerable. Foreign aid helps make their circumstances tolerable. 1/2

When your policy for hiring and retaining federal workers is all about party loyalty rather than qualifications, you are doing what some people accuses DEI policies of doing.

What's a good name for this practice of hiring based on party allegiance without regard for the ability to do the job?

The definition of a conservative I grew up with: you are cautious about changing inherited institutions and traditions and ways of doing things too quickly, since what took generations to build can be destroyed far more quickly.

Would love to be included in this!

Wishing you the blessings of the Advent season. We wait on anticipation of a good that transcends this world, and yet descends into it.

If you take it that they use "toxic masculinity" as a label for all expressions of masculinity, or just for being male, then I agree that such usage is harmful. But we disagree about whether that is how the term "toxic masculinity" is generally used.

You say your understanding of "toxic masculinity" is not a misunderstanding but fits the standard usage. But you have yet to say what you take that usage to be. You call it something coined by toxic extremists. But what is this definition they have coined, if not the one I lay out in the OP?

Where did I say masculinity is toxic? I said that a specific way of conceiving masculinity is toxic--namely, the way that celebrates treating women as things to be used and bullying boys who don't fit a cultural mold. Is it a "masandrist trope" to condemn abusiveness?

So that leads me to infer that your understanding is either a misunderstanding or a response to outlier usage I haven't personally come across. Either way, the usage you presumably deplore wouldn't be the usage I want to defend.

I can only assume you have a different understanding of how "toxic masculinity" is used than the one I unpack above. But the one above is widely endorsed by those who actually use the term, indicating it's what they actually intend.

In the name of charity, I'll assume you're not celebrating indecency and arguing that real men should treat women like things to be used and ought to abuse boys who don't conform to that. But then I'm at a loss to unpack what you mean.

But if that's what you mean, then you are celebrating indecency in the name of masculinity. And if it's not what you mean, then you are ignoring the substance of my original posts and challenging something else altogether.

Just to be clear, I call "toxic" a species of masculinity that depends on objectifying women & bullying boys who don't fit the mold. So, it follows from what you said above that you think it's unnatural for men *not* to bully and objectify, & it's toxic to oppose bullying and objectifying.

To condemn such "toxic" masculinity is not to condemn being a man, but to call for a new conception of what it is to be a man--a wider, more humane, more liberating conception.

They have in mind the view of manhood that leaves many men isolated and repressed--isolated because real intimacy and sharing of feelings is deemed unmanly; repressed because things they love and talents they have (ballet, perhaps) aren't on the approved "masculine" list.

They have in mind the view of manhood that fuels the bullying of boys who don't fit the mold, that encourages homophobic violence, and that magnifies sexual violence against women.

They have in mind a view of masculinity that makes male value depend on the sexual objectification of women: being a "real" man becomes about getting laid, scoring, etc. Women stop being people and become the field on which manhood is proved through conquest.

They have in mind a view of masculinity that puts rigid boundaries around what it is to be a man, boundaries that many men don't fit into without being bent and broken, without having bits and pieces of who they are shaved off to accommodate the box.

Just to clarify, when people speak of "toxic masculinity" they do not mean "masculinity, all of which is toxic." They mean "the kind of masculinity that's toxic." It's a particular conception of what it is to be a man that's being challenged, not manhood itself.

Many years ago as a teen, I got to my violin lesson and my teacher said, "Hey, try out this violin." I played a few notes. It was *amazing*.

Turns out it was a Stradivarius.

Today, I put a new brand of strings on my old German violin (ones I got as a gift)...and it was like that.

Holy $#!*.

COVER REVEAL!

Front and back covers of my new book, forthcoming in the new year.

The cover image is by Munch, my mother's favorite painters.

My mother passed away while I was completing this book, so the cover doesn't just fit the book's theme but is a wonderful tribute to her memory.

It's a great book. So is the sequel, The Parable of the Talents.